Microsoft blames PC makers for underwhelming Windows 8 sales over Christmas, The Register has learned. The software giant accused manufacturers of not building enough attractive Win 8-powered touchscreen tablets.
But the computer makers are fighting back: they claimed that if they’d followed Microsoft’s hardware requirements …

COMMENTS

Page:

Re: I thought that flogging had been banned...

@phil o'sophical what exactly is it you're doing on your monitor while using the start menu? Telemetry (customer improvement program) from Windows 7 told MS that once start was pressed people never used anything else while start was open (dead giveaway, if you do start closes!). If you've found a way to use the start menu while also working on other things then perhaps you should let them know and stop whining about it?

Re: I thought that flogging had been banned...

It does NOT have a start screen, it may be labeled "start" but in terms of functionality it should be called a "task panel" as that is what it is. Can you launch ANY application from it? No? Then sorry but it ain't a start screen, its a task panel. Same as the "charms bar" is a SIDEBAR, it comes from the side, has gadgets on it, no different than the Vista sidebar except it auto-hides which isn't enough for a full on rename.

This is one of the many problems with "WinME the second coming" in that its obvious a good 90% of the changes are for tablets and cellphones. Not running it on a tablet or cellphone? Then its made of frustration and fail. ironically those that run it on a tablet don't care for it much either as the "desktop app" has to be used (settings are scattered between it and metro task panel for example) and as it has been since XP Tablet Edition the desktop metaphor just doesn't work well on a tablet.

Even though I don't care for or own any Apple products I have to give them credit, they didn't just jam OSX onto a tablet and call it a day, all MSFT did was bolt a half baked tablet UI on top of their desktop UI thus breaking both. great job MSFT, first OS since WinME I'm actively avoiding, even Vista wasn't THIS bad.

more proof

Re: more proof

"MS know they are in trouble, but dont have any real way to fix it"

I think that's harsh, even unfair. For all their faults, MS are trying to evolve towards a post PC world, where there are multiple input modes - touch, voice, keyboards, mice, and Kinect style controllers, and where the centrality of monolithic PC's is diluted by laptops, tablets, and phones.

W8 is admittedly a rather unsatisfactory compromise as issued, and if they only offered an easy "in the box" ability to switch between touch + app, and traditional desktop mode, then things might have been a bit better (for myself I'm happy with the Classic Shell add on). But for all the IT-types round here who whine about it, you have to wonder what happened to the days when IT was about enabling new technologies, and dragging the enterprise into the future? To judge by the love for XP, your average corporate IT function is desperate to stay in 2001.

The users are revolting (more so than usual) with a probably mythical head of steam for BYOD, but even though that's overplayed, where's the noise coming from? Probably a reaction of opinion forming users to the stick in the muds of IT trying to foist brick like Thinkpads, XP, and Blackberries onto users who have seen better, and want it.

So who is the real problem here? IT pros who can't keep up with the times, or Microsoft for having the temerity to try and evolve a bit?

Re: more proof

"So who is the real problem here? IT pros who can't keep up with the times, or Microsoft for having the temerity to try and evolve a bit?"

Well I think I know who 's position I would rather be in, and it ain't Microsoft's.

Technology is all well and good but it is a means and not an end. Companies and people want to use their computers as tools to do "real" work, not live on the bleeding edge of technology, that's for the hackers of this world.

IT departments. have a poor reputation for being inflexible, resistant to change and not having the user as a priority. This may well be the perception, but don't forget the IT department has a job and a responsibility to the rest of the organisation.

It's the guardian of the security of the data held and must make sure that anything new coming along is fit for purpose and will not pose a risk to the company's most valued information. Stuff must be tested and guaranteed to be safe and if that means a delay in rolling out the latest and greatest, well sorry, but if the brown stuff goes into orbit after a security breach you can guess where the finger of blame will point.

Generally IT departments do as their management directs, this may seem to be obstructionist to someone eager to get the latest fix for their work, but again, safety first.

Don't forget also, it's the company that makes the decision on what to buy and how to deploy IT resources. After all they are picking up the bill.

As for MS it seems as if they can't find their own arse with a map, at least not Apple's recent offering, and are floundering around blaming everyone but themselves for the long predicted flop that is Windows 8. Like Ubuntu and Gnome they definitely seem to be heading down the wrong track and folks are not following.

Re: more proof

That would be Microsoft (obviously).

I got enough wails of protest when my users were faced with the ribbon for the first time I'd rather not think about the wailing and gnashing of teeth if I handed them Windows 8 as is. Yes I could add "Classic Shell" to every desk top in the same way that back in the day I had a DesktopX setup. But really why should I bother? Windows 7 works well and has years of life in it.

The reality is MS does have a way to fix this but won't. They just need to add the option to choose which interface to use at boot (like my Ubuntu setup at home) and keep the upgrade price down. For £25 each I'd be willing to upgrade our machines and if they discovered it themselves I reckon a fair few of my users would be happy with TIFKAM if they discovered it for themselves. If I imposed it by diktat - not a chance.

Unfortunately for any of that to happen MS will have to admit they cocked up. I'm not going to hold my breath.

Re: more proof

If MS hadn't gone out of their way to force TIFKAM down our throats and disable the old Start desktop interface then there wouldn't have been the fuss. THAT'S what has got them into trouble. They could have got away with a system where touchscreen and tablet users got TIFKAM by default and everyone else got a conventional desktop.

Re: more proof@nematoad

All valid comments, and ones with which I have a lot of sympathy. But much of the "guardian of security of the data" arguments now read a bit like the the sort of stuff that gets the H&S staff such a bad name. IT remains a function that often overlooks that it is only as good as its reputation, not its reality. That's why outsourcing the help desk is so often a disaster, because they are the people who are the first point of contact.

And in this context, the obsession with testing and sticking with the safe tend to work against IT. Rolling out a new OS in a big business can be a big deal, but when the directors want access on their iPads there's always a work around. And when a new OS, new hardware or anything better or cooler is being "tested", it's always the senior IT bods who volunteer to test the kit. How selfless! Can't be important for the CIO or his reports to have secure reliable IT, so they'll be the guinea pigs.

It is a challenge to be on top of the new, and run a secure reliable IT service, but I'm simply not convinced that most CIO's try hard enough. That isn't a plea for everybody or anybody to roll out W8,m but just an observation that IT professionals are playing catchup, and seem widely reluctant to embrace a future that seems more diverse, and moving away from the comfortable world of standardisation that we currently see as the route to the goals of low cost and security.

Re: I think that's harsh, even unfair.

And when your key market is businesses running cube farms that's a really, really stupid thing to do. If this were MS reaching out to the gadget-hungry manager or trendy blogger with a sideline in mobile devices then it could be judged on its merits. But it's not. It's them trying to foist their all-fits-one-size approach on everyone and it's unravelling their business.

Now, back to what I was trying to remember - where did 'blaming every else' come on that list of 'how to spot a sociopath' I saw the other week?

Re: more proof

I think Microsoft is in a "you can't have your cake and eat it too" situation.

The would like to make billions on hardware too, like Apple, but they are alienating the OEMs, the original source of their success yesterday. And why should they not try to invent something new and fantastic. But the way they do it alienates their users too. I would accept the ribbon if I could get rid of it once and for all, easily.

I remember Gates was so impressed with the same Windows for every device. Sounds more like a way to cut costs than anything else.

It's the guardian of the security of the data held

Yeah, right. That's probably the reason why IE6 was still the mandated browser in many companies when the non-corporate rest of the world had long moved on, right?

If IT departments were the 'Guardians of Security' then they would implement processes to test and roll out updates quickly, they would stay on top of developments (not only in the IT security field) or start working on migration plans early on (when the successor product comes out).

The reality is that many (most?) IT departments is that it's mostly driven by cost-cutting and lazyness. That's why they are still on Windowsxp (an 11 year OS with worse security than it's three generations of successors), that's why they keep mediocre virus scanners like Sophos or McAffee deployed (which have terrible detecion rates but are simple to manage), and that's also the reason why migrations are pushed down the road until it is almost to late. Whatever makes life easy, unless of course someone who's at a level where he can make life of an IT bod quite miserable comes along and asks for a favor of course, then the sky's the limit.

It doesn't have to be done this way (I worked on a place that had a very good IT department), but the above attitude unfortunately is not an exception but the norm.

Re: It's the guardian of the security of the data held

"...it's mostly driven by cost-cutting and lazyness. That's why they are still on Windowsxp (an 11 year OS with worse security than it's three generations of successors), that's why they keep mediocre virus scanners like Sophos or McAffee deployed (which have terrible detecion rates but are simple to manage), and that's also the reason why migrations are pushed down the road until it is almost to late. Whatever makes life easy, ..."

Lumping cost cutting and laziness together like they are the same thing, and the "fault" of the same people, isn't really accurate.

Despite most large companies now being completely dependant on their IT, it is still often looked on as a non-productive overhead & as such is the first to be hit by the cost-cutting hammer. The cost of rolling out a new OS in a large company isn't exactly cheap (hint, it's an awful lot more than the costs of the license!), and the bigger the change from a user point of view the more expensive & disruptive it is, which is why many go with the old "if it ain't broke don't fix it" view and are still on XP.

...wait, are you talking about us, CTOs (or CIOs, Director of ITs etc) who are so afraid of change that we are even willing to switch to linux or anything else if we get a proper GUI, with desktop, Start Menu etc, instead of rolling out this pile of dual-desktop'd, half-baked broken PoS an undergrad student wouldn't dare to submit in school?

Re: more proof

> you have to wonder what happened to the days when IT was about enabling new technologies,

Windows 8, Windows RT, Surface, touch screens are _NOT_ 'new technologies'. Everything in there has been around for years, some of it even from MS. Windows touch tablets have been available for a decade but have failed in the market because Windows software, the stuff users actually care about, just doesn't work well with touch.

IT has been 'enabling' iPads and Androids for quite some time and MS is trying to catch up. It was told by consultants that WP7 failed to sell well because the UI was 'unfamiliar'. To fix that they embarked on a crusade to make it "the most familiar UI" by forcing it down the throats of Windows users. Once the users grow to love it (or die!) they will _demand_ it on their tablets and phones and MS will destroy Apple and Google.

Even the animated tiles of TIFKAM are not 'new technologies', Windows 98 had 'active desktop' which was rejected en mass.

Re: more proof

Re: more proof

concur.

I don't necessarily mind booting into Metro as it does give one a very quick overview of some data and it is very easy to switch to the desktop. However not everyone may have the same inclination, and I do agree that it should be the consumers choice what they boot into. I do also concur that removing the Start Button/Menu was a bad choice on MS's part.

Re: more proof@nematoad

"it's always the senior IT bods who volunteer to test the kit"

At the one place I worked where we had the senior managers on-site they used what everyone else used, as they needed to get stuff done and could not afford to have a new piece of kit fold up under them.

Their work was just too important.

The people who did get to play with the new stuff were generally the team leaders and senior support staff, even then it was a case of using the new kit as a secondary device or program, not the primary.

As safety was the prime consideration, you don't want dodgy kit running an oil refinery, we were VERY careful about rolling out new stuff, even if the users were screaming blue murder. It got tested and screened and then sent to another team to verify, before it was even put to the Change Committee.

So yes, in a one-man-band or very small company it might be OK to give new stuff to everybody, but having worked at very sensitive sites, i.e. places that could blow up or in the financial industry, the IT department was ultra-cautious in changing anything unless it had been thoroughly vetted. We had no choice, that was what our bosses told us to do.

Re: It's the guardian of the security of the data held

"The reality is that many (most?) IT departments is that it's mostly driven by cost-cutting and lazyness."

I'm talking from experience of working at some of the largest companies in the world.

At one site we had over 4500 users and 2500 PCs and servers etc. And that was just one site with dozens spread all over the world.

So yes, things did take a while to go through the system but it's like a huge oil tanker, you can't just put on the brakes. In this case size does matter and although the average user only saw his or her own little piece of the picture, in reality we did the job as fast as we could coupled with all the security and safety considerations needed on a site where it could literally explode or cause serious risk to life if something went wrong.

Cost cutting may be a goal in many industries but it this particular instance the results could have been catastrophic.

Re: Form over substance

Who are M$ ?

I can remember that I've been using Ubuntu for several years, I just can't for the life of me remember what I was using before that .

Might it have been this M$ Windows I keep hearing about ? I understand you have to pay for it . When I looked at it on my daughter's laptop I just found it so hard to use compared to my Ubuntu 10.04. Why would I want to pay for that ?

Please help me , don't tell me that I used to pay to use that stuff, that would really upset me. Although the great thing about senility is I guess I'd soon forget about it , and just carry on using Ubuntu.

Re: Who are M$ ?

It's like smoking. I used to pay through the nose to pump all sorts of vile filth into my body. Same with windows, I used to pay through the nose to have MS rubbish on my system.

I also used to pay through the nose for medical bills thanks to my smoking. Same with Windows, lots of time and money wasted on "doctors bills" in the sense of AV, security and such extras that have to be bolted on.

Microsoft's conceited arrogance...

Microsoft seem to become more arrogant as time passes. When Microsoft produced Windows XP in 2001, they shipped it with two interfaces; Fisher-Price and Windows 2000. Looking at it now, there's hardly any difference, but obviously enough to concern Microsoft about alienating their user community.

Now wind forwards eleven years... Microsoft produce a radically different UI that will take most people a *lot* of getting used to -- and that's ignoring the valid argument that it's an inappropriate 'touch' UI foisted on a Keyboard/Mouse/Window interface.

This time Microsoft are so arrogant that they make not the slightest concession to people used to their "old" way of doing things. They produce a radically new operating system, Windows RT, which requires a leap of faith that you'll be able to get applications, and charge MORE than the market leading iPad.

Re: Microsoft's conceited arrogance...

Well, to be fair, they have included the non-Metro trad interface for people who would like it.

However to also be fair; my experience trying to help a couple of non-techy folk who have recently had to replace their laptops is that they are completely completely baffled by Windows 8 and hate it. I ended up having to install a Start menu add on for them.

I mean whose smart idea was it to hide Settings etc. under a completely undiscoverable hot-corner?

Re: Microsoft's conceited arrogance...

Re: Microsoft's conceited arrogance...

" This time Microsoft are so arrogant that they make not the slightest concession to people used to their "old" way of doing things."

While I agree with this to an extent, there reality is that a) for most of the PC era, the market for new users has exceeded the market of current users, and that is where the design specs are targetted; 2) PC users have shown themselves willing to dive into foreign mobile interfaces on iOS and Android, plus on home media centres.

The biggest markets for the old style interface are mostly in huge corporations where special install images are generally made to lay down a custom version of Windows and approved programs.

Re: Microsoft's conceited arrogance...

I mean whose smart idea was it to hide Settings etc. under a completely undiscoverable hot-corner?

Ah! you mean the hot corners it tells you about when installed? I take it you failed to relay this to the said people hence their difficulty (I take it you installed it).

However to also be fair; my experience trying to help a couple of non-techy folk who have recently had to replace their laptops is that they are completely completely baffled by Windows 8 and hate it. I ended up having to install a Start menu add on for them.

Again, you tried foisting something on someone without first knowing how to use it yourself and then training the people concerned (btw it takes 15 minutes at most to explain the differences).

I find that it is actually faster for what I need to do now I have learn't how to use it. Desktop / Metro switching is a pain but only takes using the machine for 10 minutes to get used to. Again the shut down being in settings is just silly. But if you don't understand the OS yourself why are you trying to put it on peoples PC's?

Re: Microsoft's conceited arrogance...

@Ragarath

Basic user interface principles state that if you can interact with something, then it ought to be differentiated in some way from the non-interactive bits. Generally this is done with underlines, colours, animation, boxes, etc. If it's somewhere you are likely to move your mouse over frequently, you can resort to something that happens only when you mouseover it, a corner isn't generally where you move your mouse a lot though.

Existing vs "new" "users"**

@hitmouse

> ...the market for new users has exceeded the market of current users

Really? Just where are these "new" "users"** hiding? Anyone in work will be using Windows (tips nod to minority of Mac & Linix people) and by definition these will have used Windows, i.e. they're not new. Similarly for the computing at home crowd; most of them already have their computer systems and again, most of these will be Windows machines.

Apart from unborn babies or undiscovered tribes in the Amazon, where do these Windows virgins come from?

What's odd is that apparently the user interface had to be completely redesigned for these mythical people.

** Only two groups of people call their customers users: the IT industry and drugs pushers.

Re: Microsoft's conceited arrogance... @AC

Basic user interface principles state that if you can interact with something, then it ought to be differentiated in some way from the non-interactive bits. Generally this is done with underlines, colours, animation, boxes, etc. If it's somewhere you are likely to move your mouse over frequently, you can resort to something that happens only when you mouseover it, a corner isn't generally where you move your mouse a lot though.

Telling you about it when you install it is not enough!

Why is telling you about it not enough? Is your memory that bad?

Also why do you expect underlines, colours, animations, boxes etc. to actually do something? Can you tell me why? Yes, that's right! At some point in the past that is what someone decided would work and everyone else learn't it.

I knew I would get down voted for putting in a pro MS post but please, this type of response is just not thinking about why we expect these conventions you mention to actually do something.

Re: Microsoft's conceited arrogance... @Ragarath

"Why is telling you about it not enough? Is your memory that bad?"

Actually yes - why should I be discriminated against?

"Also why do you expect underlines, colours, animations, boxes etc. to actually do something? Can you tell me why? Yes, that's right! At some point in the past that is what someone decided would work and everyone else learn't it."

And all those thousands of experiments in a field called HCI (Human Computer Interaction) conducted since the mid 1970's.

Re: Microsoft's conceited arrogance... @Ragarath

Right so if you were told that this screen is interactive you would not work out how? It seems to me it is the person that is lacking if they cannot work it out. The visual queue is rather quick you know.

Re: Microsoft's conceited arrogance... @Ragarath

Re: Microsoft's conceited arrogance... @janimal

Thanks for the word correction, was typing fast as was doing something else, my mind was not fully on the task. And there is no need for veiled insults either. I understand where you are coming from but you fail to look at it from my side at all.

Would it be improved with a small indicator in the top right yes perhaps, but I assert this is for people that do not like to be shown new things and then remember them. Now that we know of this method of interaction, and if a new device came with no indicators, but you knew it was touch, would you not try this method? I know I would.

Yes it may be different but that is how things change we adapt and learn. Did you know how to drive a car just by looking at it for example?

Re: Microsoft's conceited arrogance...

It's all very well MS dictating hardware spec to its OEMs for Windows 8, and those OEMs may well look to providing that level of hardware support in the future. But let's face it - the run up to Christmas was the trasitionery period when all the OEMs were ever going to do was shoehorn Windows 8 onto their end-of-life Windows 7 stock to give it a new lease of life.

Re: Windows 7 stock?

It doesn't require more power. My Windows 8 machine is running on the same hardware as my W7, Vista and XP had previously done. It actually requires less resources than previous OSes, other than XP, but allows you to do more than XP.

Re: Windows 7 stock?

@AC:

"It doesn't require more power. My Windows 8 machine is running on the same hardware as my W7, Vista and XP had previously done. It actually requires less resources than previous OSes, other than XP, but allows you to do more than XP."

I agree it seems to run slightly better than Win 7 on the same spec machines, but what the hell does Win 8 *DO MORE* than Win 7 - except piss-off the majority of it's users?

Re: Windows 7 stock?

@Tom 7: "W7 stock is generally pretty powerful. I personally cannot see why the so called glaringly simple interface of W8 requires such much more power to do... , well to do what?"

The key areas where Microsoft were pushing harder was in places like vastly improved touch experiences. Most Windows 7 machines with touch suffer from awful lag, poor detection around the edges of the screen and often quite low touch resolution. All of which leads to a poor experience. It's in meeting the requirements for a decent touch screen that OEMs are grumbling about, which is also the reason they aren't just shipping Windows RT on their cheapo Android hardware, which just doesn't cut the mustard for a quality experience.

Re: they aren't just shipping Windows RT on their cheapo Android hardware

Re: Windows 7 stock?

> they aren't just shipping Windows RT on their cheapo Android hardware

Windows RT is written for a very limited range of specific ARM SoCs, just as WP7 was (but they are quite different ones). If the hardware isn't one of those, plus has identical support chips then it just won't work.

Android on the other hand, can be configured and added to by the manufacturers so they can make it work any way they want with whatever hardware they choose.

With WP7 MS had dictated the specific hardware well before the OS was ready, so even the original models were not bleeding edge. By the end they were well obsolete. Microsoft has always worked to a roughly 3 year cycle. If they don't keep developing for newer hardware at much more frequent intervals then Windows RT and WP8 will be stuck with old hardware while others take newer developments.

With x86 this wasn't so much an issue because rate of development was so much slower.

Bought an 11" Asus Vivobook. Cracking wee laptop with an OS that fits perfectly, is intuitive to use and does not hinder my ability to carry out any tasks (that the hardware specs are capable of dealing with).

re: Bought an 11" Asus Vivobook

Looks like a netbook to me - remember those, before MSFT killed them off? If everyone was in the market for that sort of machine (or a premium priced oversized tablet) then W8 would probably do quite well, but they aren't ...